Womackv.Hellings

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 6, 2000

08283539 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 6, 2000)

Filed on June 5, 1995.1
Based on application 08/283,539, filed on August 1,2
1994.
The opinion in support of the decision being
entered today is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 21
Filed by: Trial Section Merits Panel
Box Interference
Washington, D.C. 20231
Tel: 703-308-9797
Fax: 703-305-0942
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
JAMES T. WOMACK
Junior Party,
(Application 08/464,553) ,1
v.
DEBORAH HELLINGS
Senior Party
(Patent No. 5,467,998)2
_______________
Patent Interference 103,960
_______________
Before: McKELVEY, Senior Administrative Patent Judge, and
SCHAFER and LEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO 37 CFR § 1.662
Interference No. 103,960
Womack v. Hellings
- 2 -
On March 2, 2000, senior party Hellings filed a paper
entitled “Decision Made Between Party Womack and Party
Hellings” and signed by both counsel for the junior party and
counsel for the senior party. (Paper No. 20). The submission
states:
Party Hellings and Party Womack have exchanged and
examined evidence. Based on the evidence, Party
Hellings and Party Womack have agreed that Party
Hellings has priority.
The submission is taken as a joint request for entry of
adverse judgment against junior party Womack pursuant to 37
CFR § 1.662(a). The request is granted. It is
ORDERED that judgment on priority as to Count 1, the
sole count in the interference, is awarded against junior
party JAMES T. WOMACK.
FURTHER ORDERED that judgment on priority as to
Count 1 is awarded in favor of senior party DEBORAH HELLINGS.
FURTHER ORDERED that, on the record before the Board
of Patent Appeals and Interferences, senior party DEBORAH
HELLINGS is entitled to a patent containing claims 1-3
(corresponding to Count 1) of U.S. Patent 5,467,998.
FURTHER ORDERED that junior party JAMES T.
Interference No. 103,960
Womack v. Hellings
- 3 -
WOMACK is not entitled to a patent containing claims 1-6
(corresponding to Count 1) of application 08/464,553.
Interference No. 103,960
Womack v. Hellings
- 4 -
FURTHER ORDERED that if there is a settlement
agreement, attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. § 135(c) and
37 CFR § 1.661.
______________________________
FRED E. McKELVEY, Senior )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
______________________________)
RICHARD E. SCHAFER ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
______________________________)
JAMESON LEE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Interference No. 103,960
Womack v. Hellings
- 5 -
By Federal Express
Counsel for the senior party:
Lawrence L. Carnes
Innovation Park
1673 West Paul Dirac Drive
Tallahassee, Florida 32310-3763
Counsel for the junior party:
Michael E. Wilson
Baker & Botts, L.L.P.
910 Louisiana
One Shell Plaza
Houston, Texas 77002-4995